Open Access
Issue
ITM Web Conf.
Volume 33, 2020
International Conference on ICT enhanced Social Sciences and Humanities (ICTeSSH 2020)
Article Number 02001
Number of page(s) 8
Section Repositories and Databases
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/itmconf/20203302001
Published online 14 August 2020
  1. European Commission: Assessing Europe’s University-Based Research: Expert Group on Assessment of University-Based Research. Directorate-General for Research. (2010) https://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/assessing-europe-university-based-research_en.pdf [Google Scholar]
  2. European Parliamentary Research ServiceMeasuring scientific performance for improved policymaking. Science and Technology Options Assessment. PE 527.383. (2014) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2014/527383/IPOL-JOIN_ET(2014)527383(SUM01)_EN.pdf [Google Scholar]
  3. Waltman, L. Open Metadata of Scholarly Publications. Open Science Monitor Case Study. (European Commission, July 2019) https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/research_and_innovation/open_metadata_of_sc holarly_publications_0.pdf [Google Scholar]
  4. Martin, B., Tang, P., Morgan, M., Glänzel, W., Hornbostel, S., Lauer, G., … Žic- Fuchs, M. Towards a Bibliometric Database for the Social Sciences and Humanities - A European Scoping Project. (2010) https://globalhighered.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/esf_report_final_100309.pdf [Google Scholar]
  5. European Commission. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (EU) 2018/790 of 25 April 2018 on access to and preservation of scientific information. (2018) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018H0790&from=EN [Google Scholar]
  6. Science Europe. Plan S: Accelerating the transition to full and immediate Open Access to scientific publications. (2018) https://www.coalition-s.org/ [Google Scholar]
  7. Sivertsen, G. Scientometrics, 107:2, 357–368 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1845-1 [Google Scholar]
  8. Aksnes, D. W. & Sivertsen, G. (2019). Journal of Data and Information Science, 4:1, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2019-0001 [Google Scholar]
  9. Gusenbauer, M. Scientometrics 118, 177–214 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2958-5">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2958-5 [Google Scholar]
  10. Piwowar, H., Priem, J., Larivière, V., Alperin, J. P., Matthias, L., Norlander, B., … & Haustein, S. PeerJ, 6, e4375. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4375 [Google Scholar]
  11. Gorraiz, J., Melero-Fuentes, D., Gumpenberger, C., & Valderrama-Zurián, J.-C. Journal of Informetrics, 10:1, 98–109 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.11.008 [Google Scholar]
  12. Boudry, C., & Chartron, G. Scientometrics, 110:3, 1453–1469 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2225-6 [Google Scholar]
  13. Fasae, J. K. & Oriogu, C. D. Library Philosophy and Practice. 1785 (2018) https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1785 [Google Scholar]
  14. Sīle, L., Guns, R., Sivertsen, G., & Engels, T. C. E. European Databases and Repositories for Social Sciences and Humanities Research Output. Antwerp: ECOOM & ENRESSH (2017). https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5172322.v2 [Google Scholar]
  15. The Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). (2012). https://sfdora.org [Google Scholar]
  16. Hicks, D., Wouters, P. F., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., and Rafols, I. Nature, 520:7548, 429–431 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a [Google Scholar]
  17. Wilsdon, J. et al. The Metric Tide. Report of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. HEFCE (2015). Https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4929.1363 [Google Scholar]
  18. Kulczycki, E., Engels, T., Pölönen, J., Bruun, K., Duskova, M., Guns, R., Nowotniak, R., Petr, M., Sivertsen, G., Starčič, A., & Zuccala, A. Scientometrics, 116:1, 463-486 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2711-0 [Google Scholar]
  19. Kulczycki, E., Guns, R., Pölönen J., Engels, T., Rozkosz, E. & Zuccala, A., Bruun, K., Eskola, O., Starčič, A.I., Petr, M. & Sivertsen, G. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, (2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24336 [Google Scholar]
  20. Puuska, H. M., Guns, R., Pölönen, J., Sivertsen, G., Mañana-Rodríguez, J., & Engels, T. Proof of concept of a European database for social sciences and humanities publications: description of the VIRTA-ENRESSH pilot. ENRESSH report (2018). https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5993506 [Google Scholar]
  21. Sivertsen, G. Developing Current Research Information Systems (CRIS) as data sources for studies of research. in Glänzel, W., Moed, H.F., Schmoch, U., Thelwall, M. (Eds.), Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators. Cham: Springer, 667-683 (2019). ISBN 978-3-030-02511-3. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.